How do you determine obstruction?

[IRISHMAFIA]

If there is no reaction or deviation by the runner, it isn't obstruction.

[WestMichiganBlue]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

1 - By definition, there needs to be some affect on the B/BR/R for OBS to be in effect.
2 - If there is no reaction or deviation by the runner, it isn't obstruction.
3 - I'm going to have to see the effect of the OBS

Your first two sentences are correct, but you don’t say how you personally define “affect,” or “reaction” or “deviation.”

In your 3rd sentence you say that you have to see the effect of obstruction. You want the runner to sell you on the fact that she has been obstructed.

In doing so, haven’t you transferred the onus for obstruction from the defender to the runner? IMO, ASA places the responsibility on the defender.

The book DOES NOT say that obstruction is the act of a runner who deviates from their intended path due the presence of a defender without the ball. What it does say is:


Obstruction definition is “the act of a defensive player” . . . . . who impedes.

Rule 5.3 states that “[b]a fielder obstructs. . . . . . ./b]

RS #36 says that “obstruction is the act of a fielder. . . . . .

ASA February 2010 Plays and Clarifications: “a defensive player impeding or hindering the runner’s advancing or returning to a base by the action of blocking the base.


Finally – ASA casebook play 8.6.7: after a tag play collision, the ball gets away but the defender is on top of the runner, preventing her from advancing. The umpire calls obstruction and sends the runner to the next base even though the runner did not attempt to advance!

Per this play, it is the act of impeding rather than the visibly reaction of the runner that determined obstruction.

Since the 2004 rule change, ASA position has been that defenders should not be blocking a base, but that they should catch first, and then block. Nothing about “seeing” a runner deviate.

In the process of the play while you are trying to watch the ball and defender and runner, would you see the eyes of the runner open wide, or a slight twitch of the body as she makes a decision on how to react to the block in front of her?

IMO, a blocking defender does not belong there, and the benefit of doubt should go to the runner, not the defender.


WMB

[Dakota]

For there to be obstruction, the runner must be impeded. This is umpire judgment, but the umpire must have something on which to base his judgment. The physical location of a defender is not, in and of itself, impeding a runner.

From the February ASA Rule Clarifications:

Rule 8, Section 5B: Obstruction

There seems to be some question on the ASA obstruction rule as discussed in Rule Supplement 36. It states that “If a defensive player is blocking the base or base path without the ball, they are impeding the progress of the runner and this is obstruction.” This has been interpreted by some to say that regardless of the location of the runner or runners blocking a base is obstruction. Therefore, regardless of where the runner is, for example 20 feet from the base, in ASA this is obstruction. This is a misunderstanding of the Rule Supplement. The sentence is being taken out of context and should be applied with the rest of Rule Supplement 36.

However, it is also important to remember that a Rule Supplement is not a rule but written to support the rule. Our rule clearly states that it is obstruction if there is impeding of the runner. To have obstruction while blocking a base there must be two elements involved: 1) A defensive player blocking the base or base path without possession of the ball and 2) a defensive player impeding or hindering the runner’s advancing or returning to a base by the action of blocking the base.

Ruling: No. R1 was not impeded or hindered on the way to the plate. (Rule 1, Definition; Rule 8, Section 5B)

Merely potentially being in the way is not sufficient. Personally, I don't have a big problem with what you stated in your original post, where once the defender remains blocking as the runner and defender reach close proximity, you judge that as impeding the runner. But, I look for some physical indicator that the runner did something in order to avoid, etc., the defender, rather than proceed directly to the base

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by WestMichiganBlue

Your first two sentences are correct, but you don’t say how you personally define “affect,” or “reaction” or “deviation.”

In your 3rd sentence you say that you have to see the effect of obstruction. You want the runner to sell you on the fact that she has been obstructed.

Your words, not mine.

In doing so, haven’t you transferred the onus for obstruction from the defender to the runner? IMO, ASA places the responsibility on the defender.

The book DOES NOT say that obstruction is the act of a runner who deviates from their intended path due the presence of a defender without the ball. What it does say is:


Obstruction definition is “the act of a defensive player” . . . . . who impedes.

Rule 5.3 states that “a fielder obstructs. . . . . . ./b]

RS #36 says that “obstruction is the act of a fielder. . . . . .

ASA February 2010 Plays and Clarifications: “a defensive player impeding or hindering the runner’s advancing or returning to a base by the action of blocking the base.


Finally – ASA casebook play 8.6.7: after a tag play collision, the ball gets away but the defender is on top of the runner, preventing her from advancing. The umpire calls obstruction and sends the runner to the next base even though the runner did not attempt to advance!

Per this play, it is the act of impeding rather than the visibly reaction of the runner that determined obstruction.

Since the 2004 rule change, ASA position has been that defenders should not be blocking a base, but that they should catch first, and then block. Nothing about “seeing” a runner deviate.

In the process of the play while you are trying to watch the ball and defender and runner, would you see the eyes of the runner open wide, or a slight twitch of the body as she makes a decision on how to react to the block in front of her?

[b]IMO, a blocking defender does not belong there, and the benefit of doubt should go to the runner, not the defender.


WMB

I have no idea what the **** you are talking about.